Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Maybe, just maybe, the POS finally went too far.

 

[walrus]

Maybe, just maybe, the POS finally went too far.

If not now, later. The guy has the control of a 2.5 yr old. Throws a temper tantrum with the least amount of provacation. The only thing he could do in that case was ignore it and just say I'm sorry the family lost their son. But he is too ignorant to do that. What's even better is jeff sessions is defending him. Another booger eater.

 

[burd]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

And just 12 years ago. Although the demographics of the electorate are changing, it happened only 12 years ago.

A very close friend was an embassy doc in Delhi at the time and described how morale in the foreign service suffered when Bush decided to invade Iraq and how incredulous not only our foreign service officers but Indians and diplomatic corps from other countries were when he was reelected a year and a half later, after it was obvious it was a huge mistake. There was no reasonable explanation.

 

[walrus]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

NY Post has Trumps wife nude on the front cover of todays paper ***

 

[rufus]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

So tell me, you say you aren't voting for Trump. You hate Hillary. So I assume you're voting Johnson/Weld. What is it about their platform that appeals to you? Do you even know their stances on policy? Or is it simply because they aren't a D or an R?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Maybe, just maybe, the POS finally went too far.

Irrelevant. Just like Iraq was irrelevant. People think Kerry was hated and had no charisma. I give you Hillary Clinton.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

So tell me, you say you aren't voting for Trump. You hate Hillary. So I assume you're voting Johnson/Weld. What is it about their platform that appeals to you? Do you even know their stances on policy? Or is it simply because they aren't a D or an R?

I'm not voting, period. IF I were to be forced to vote, I'd end up writing in some asinine random person. Hell, I could write your name in.

I will probably learn the (I) platforms in case I decide to vote at the last minute, but I won't blindly vote for a candidate just because (insert random reason).

Edit: in reality, and I think we all know this, this country is a 2-party system, and will continue to be that way for a long, long time. No (I) has a shot at winning, IMO.

 

[ericredaxe]

I'm not voting, period. IF I were to be forced to vote, I'd end up writing in some asinine random person. Hell, I could write your name in.

I will probably learn the (I) platforms in case I decide to vote at the last minute, but I won't blindly vote for a candidate just because (insert random reason).

You can learn about Johnson/Weld here: https://www.johnsonweld.com

As a moderate republican, Weld was hugely popular in heavily democratic Massachusetts and by most people's opinion did a great job.

 

[rufus]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

I'm not voting, period. IF I were to be forced to vote, I'd end up writing in some asinine random person. Hell, I could write your name in.

I will probably learn the (I) platforms in case I decide to vote at the last minute, but I won't blindly vote for a candidate just because (insert random reason).

Edit: in reality, and I think we all know this, this country is a 2-party system, and will continue to be that way for a long, long time. No (I) has a shot at winning, IMO.

So you're taking the cop-out, and rather just sit on the sidelines and ****** rather than doing something. And here's our problem in a nutshell.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

So you're taking the cop-out, and rather just sit on the sidelines and ****** rather than doing something. And here's our problem in a nutshell.

It's far from a cop-out. I don't like either major party candidate. I'm not going to be forced to choose one. What if some other (I) is perfect for me, but they might only get half-percent of the vote at best? The result is the same, do I get the right to b* then?

 

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

"I'm not voting for THAT woman, Hillary Clinton?", while pointing to Shelia Jackson?

I'm not pointing, though.

 

[RaceBoarder]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

I'm not voting, period. IF I were to be forced to vote, I'd end up writing in some asinine random person. Hell, I could write your name in.

I will probably learn the (I) platforms in case I decide to vote at the last minute, but I won't blindly vote for a candidate just because (insert random reason).

Edit: in reality, and I think we all know this, this country is a 2-party system, and will continue to be that way for a long, long time. No (I) has a shot at winning, IMO.

SIMPSONS DID IT!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v7XXSt9XRM

In all reality, I'd bet that Johnson/Weld feel exactly like Perot in that video... If a 3rd party was ever going to happen, here is their chance. Next election, whomever doesn't win will just talk about the 4 year dumpster fire the US just went through and will have a low effort victory...

 

[The Rube]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

SIMPSONS DID IT!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v7XXSt9XRM

In all reality, I'd bet that Johnson/Weld feel exactly like Perot in that video... If a 3rd party was ever going to happen, here is their chance. Next election, whomever doesn't win will just talk about the 4 year dumpster fire the US just went through and will have a low effort victory...

Perot was probably the closest we'll see for a 3rd party candidate. Although I still wonder to this day why he wasn't put in charge of some financial arm of the government. Hell, hire Gates/Buffett/etc in a role like that. They know how to make money.

 

[burd]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Irrelevant. Just like Iraq was irrelevant. People think Kerry was hated and had no charisma. I give you Hillary Clinton.

I think Iraq is relevant to this election as a cautionary tale about how catastrophic the harm can be when a president makes important foreign policy decisions based upon greed, arrogance, and lack of restraint. This isn't a reality tv show.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

This isn't a reality tv show.

Wanna bet?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

I think Iraq is relevant to this election as a cautionary tale about how catastrophic the harm can be when a president makes important foreign policy decisions based upon greed, arrogance, and lack of restraint. This isn't a reality tv show.

I hope to hell Iraq and Brexit are enough of a warning.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Wanna bet?

I actually agree with this, in a way. Was it Zappa that said politics isn't about politics? It's about ratings and popularity.

It doesn't matter if you're the most qualified. It's a matter of being minimally less-bad than your opponents, and getting the "ratings." Just enough to win the office. It's terrible.

 

[burd]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

I actually agree with this, in a way. Was it Zappa that said politics isn't about politics? It's about ratings and popularity.

It doesn't matter if you're the most qualified. It's a matter of being minimally less-bad than your opponents, and getting the "ratings." Just enough to win the office. It's terrible.

It frightens me to think that people believe the difference between the risks associated with HRC and Trump presidencies is too minor to matter.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XV: Before & After: Dancing in the Streets of Philadelphia!

It frightens me to think that people believe the difference between the risks associated with HRC and Trump presidencies is too minor to matter.

Depends on your viewpoints, I suppose. As far as Hillary/Trump, they just are trying to get enough votes to win. If it's not an overall majority of the nation, oh well. Just get enough to win (to be fair, that's pretty much ANY politician, I shouldn't single out Hillary/Trump).

 

[joecct]

Perot was probably the closest we'll see for a 3rd party candidate. Although I still wonder to this day why he wasn't put in charge of some financial arm of the government. Hell, hire Gates/Buffett/etc in a role like that. They know how to make money.

I know you're a young'n, but George Wallace did very well in 1968 winning 45 electoral votes (all in the deep south).